11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Pruritus and Patient Reported Outcomes in Non-Dialysis CKD

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Among patients on hemodialysis, pruritus has been associated with poorer mental and physical quality of life, sleep quality, depression, and mortality. We evaluated patients with nondialysis CKD to describe the prevalence of pruritus, identify associated factors, and investigate associations with patient-reported outcomes. Using cross-sectional data from patient questionnaires in the CKD Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (CKDopps), we asked patients with CKD stages 3–5 (nondialysis) from the United States, Brazil, and France to identify how much they were bothered by pruritus. Response options ranged from “not at all” to “extremely.” Log-Poisson regression, yielding prevalence ratios, was used to evaluate associations of moderate-to-extreme pruritus with patient characteristics, CKD stage, self-reported depression symptoms, and restless sleep. Mixed linear regression was used to examine associations between pruritus and physical and mental component summary scores, with lower scores indicating poorer quality of life. Of the 5658 CKDopps patients enrolled in the United States, Brazil, and France, 3780 (67%) answered the pruritus question. The prevalence of moderate-to-extreme pruritus was 24%, and more likely in older patients, women, and those with stage 5 CKD, lung disease, diabetes, and physician-diagnosed depression. In adjusted models, patients with moderate pruritus had physical and mental component summary scores 3.5 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], −4.6 to −2.3) and 2.3 (95% CI, −3.2 to −1.5) points lower, respectively, than patients without pruritus, and they also had a higher adjusted prevalence of patient-reported depression (prevalence ratio, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.58 to 2.11) and restless sleep (prevalence ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.49 to 1.91) compared with patients without pruritus. These patient-reported outcomes were progressively worse with increasing severity of pruritus. Our findings demonstrate high prevalence of pruritus in nondialysis CKD, as well as strong associations of pruritus with poor health-related quality of life, self-reported depression symptoms, and self-reported poor sleep.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          A comparison of two methods for estimating prevalence ratios

          Background It is usually preferable to model and estimate prevalence ratios instead of odds ratios in cross-sectional studies when diseases or injuries are not rare. Problems with existing methods of modeling prevalence ratios include lack of convergence, overestimated standard errors, and extrapolation of simple univariate formulas to multivariable models. We compare two of the newer methods using simulated data and real data from SAS online examples. Methods The Robust Poisson method, which uses the Poisson distribution and a sandwich variance estimator, is compared to the log-binomial method, which uses the binomial distribution to obtain maximum likelihood estimates, using computer simulations and real data. Results For very high prevalences and moderate sample size, the Robust Poisson method yields less biased estimates of the prevalence ratios than the log-binomial method. However, for moderate prevalences and moderate sample size, the log-binomial method yields slightly less biased estimates than the Robust Poisson method. In nearly all cases, the log-binomial method yielded slightly higher power and smaller standard errors than the Robust Poisson method. Conclusion Although the Robust Poisson often gives reasonable estimates of the prevalence ratio and is very easy to use, the log-binomial method results in less bias in most common situations, and because it fits the correct model and obtains maximum likelihood estimates, it generally results in slightly higher power, smaller standard errors, and, unlike the Robust Poisson, it always yields estimated prevalences between zero and one.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Estimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes.

            This report extracts important considerations for determining and applying clinically significant differences in quality of life (QOL) measures from six published articles written by 30 international experts, in the field of QOL assessment and evaluation. The original six articles were presented at the Symposium on Clinical Significance of Quality of Life Measures in Cancer Patients at the Mayo Clinic in April 2002 and subsequently were published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Specific examples and formulas are given for anchor-based methods, as well as distribution-based methods that correspond to known or relevant anchors to determine important differences in QOL measures. Important prerequisites for clinical significance associated with instrument selection, responsiveness, and the reporting of QOL trial results are provided. We also discuss estimating the number needed to treat (NNT) relative to clinically significant thresholds. Finally, we provide a rationale for applying group-derived standards to individual assessments. While no single method for determining clinical significance is unilaterally endorsed, the investigation and full reporting of multiple methods for establishing clinically significant change levels for a QOL measure, and greater direct involvement of clinicians in clinical significance studies are strongly encouraged.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A longitudinal study of uremic pruritus in hemodialysis patients.

              Although uremic pruritus (UP) is a highly prevalent complication of chronic kidney disease, it remains poorly characterized. There have been no longitudinal studies of natural history, and no health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) instruments have been developed for UP. The objectives of this study were to describe the natural history of UP, to compare rating scales of itching intensity, and to assess usefulness and validity of HR-QOL instruments for UP. The intensity, severity, and effects of pathologic itching on HR-QOL were assessed prospectively in 103 patients with UP on chronic hemodialysis. Outcome measures were obtained at scheduled intervals over 3.5 months. Itching daily or nearly daily was reported by 84% of patients and had been ongoing for >1 year in 59%. In 83%, pruritus involved large, nondermatomal areas with striking bilateral symmetry. Two thirds of the patients were using medications such as antihistamines, steroids, and various emollients without satisfactory relief of itching. Statistically significant associations were found among itching intensity, severity, and HR-QOL measures in domains such as mood, social relations, and sleep. Among patients with moderate-to-severe UP, changes in itching intensity of 20% or greater were associated with significant reductions in HR-QOL measures. This first longitudinal study of UP describes key features of UP and its effect on HR-QOL. The assessment instruments we have developed are easily used, are responsive to changes in UP intensity, and should facilitate clinical evaluation and research to meet the needs of afflicted patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
                CJASN
                American Society of Nephrology (ASN)
                1555-9041
                1555-905X
                April 11 2019
                : CJN.09600818
                Article
                10.2215/CJN.09600818
                6500934
                30975656
                a08cf05c-3802-4af8-b4b7-806ac2a0fd5e
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article